Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Garden vs Supabase

Garden logo

Garden

Developer Tools

Kubernetes development and testing automation with shared caching, now owned by Incredibuild

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Supabase logo

Supabase

Technology

The open source Firebase alternative

From
Free
Free plan
Yes

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Garden incredibuild acquired Garden in November 2024 and the pricing page now redirects to documentation, so there is no public commercial offer and no published roadmap for a team betting a platform on it.; Supabase free tier projects auto-pause after 1 week of inactivity
  • They diverge on capability: Garden covers Action graph, Supabase covers PostgreSQL database.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Garden and Supabase actually diverge.

Attributes where Garden and Supabase differ
AttributeGardenSupabase
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feeUnknown
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, KubernetesWeb, iOS, Android
CategoryDeveloper ToolsTechnology
FoundedUnknown2020

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Garden

  • Action graph
  • Shared result caching
  • Remote Kubernetes environments
  • In-cluster builds
  • Same config everywhere
  • Hot reload sync
  • Helm and Kustomize support
  • Templating

Only in Supabase

  • PostgreSQL database
  • Auto-generated APIs
  • Authentication & authorization
  • Real-time subscriptions
  • Storage
  • Edge functions
  • Vector embeddings
  • Database migrations

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Garden

  • A platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loopnot Supabase
  • An organisation with thirty or more services on Kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates productionnot Supabase
  • Giving every developer an ephemeral namespace instead of queuing for one shared staging environmentnot Supabase
  • Running the identical build and test definition locally and in CI so failures reproduce on a laptopnot Supabase

Supabase

  • Web application backends using Postgres plus auto-generated REST/GraphQL APIsnot Garden
  • Mobile app backends via Flutter/Swift/Kotlin client librariesnot Garden
  • AI applications using vector/embeddings storagenot Garden
  • Authentication with 20+ social providers plus email/passwordnot Garden
  • File and media storage (S3-compatible with CDN) and realtime sync over WebSocketsnot Garden

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Garden

  • Incredibuild acquired Garden in November 2024 and the pricing page now redirects to documentation, so there is no public commercial offer and no published roadmap for a team betting a platform on it.
  • It is tightly bound to Kubernetes, so teams running on ECS, Nomad, plain VMs or serverless get little from it and would need a different tool entirely.
  • The YAML action graph is a real configuration surface: a large monorepo needs someone to own and maintain Garden config as a first-class artefact, which is a standing platform-engineering cost.
  • Shared remote environments mean every developer needs cluster access and a cost allocation model, so cloud spend rises and namespace sprawl becomes a thing you have to police.
  • Caching correctness depends on declaring dependencies accurately; an under-declared action will serve a stale cached pass and hide a genuine test failure, which is a hard class of bug to notice.

Supabase

  • Free tier projects auto-pause after 1 week of inactivity
  • Free tier hard caps: 500 MB database, 1 GB file storage, 5 GB egress/month, 50,000 monthly active users, max 2 active free projects per organization
  • Pro plan charges usage overages beyond included quotas, e.g. $0.00325 per MAU above 100,000 and $0.125/GB disk above 8 GB
  • SOC2/ISO 27001 certification and HIPAA (add-on) compliance require the $599/month Team plan; not available on the $25/month Pro plan

Pricing, plan by plan

Garden

Free
  • Garden open sourceFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed CLI
    • Full action graph and caching
    • Self-managed clusters
  • Commercial tier$undefined/year
    • Hosted caching and team features
    • Support and onboarding
    • Pricing no longer published since the Incredibuild acquisition

Supabase

Free
  • FreeFree
    • 50,000 MAU
    • 500MB database
    • 5GB egress
  • Pro$25/month
    • 100,000 MAU
    • 8GB disk
    • 250GB egress
  • Team$599/month
    • SOC2 and ISO 27001
    • HIPAA add-on
    • 28-day log / 14-day backup retention
  • Enterprise$undefined/month
    • Custom limits
    • Dedicated support manager
    • 24/7/365 support

Which should you pick?

Choose Garden if

  • You need action graph.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes.
  • You also want shared result caching.

Choose Supabase if

  • You need postgresql database.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want auto-generated apis.

Questions people ask

Is Garden or Supabase better?
Neither clearly leads. Garden starts at Free and Supabase at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Garden or Supabase?
Garden starts at Free and Supabase at Free.
Does Garden or Supabase run on more platforms?
Garden runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes. Supabase runs on Web, iOS, Android.
Can I use Garden for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Garden best used for?
Garden is most often used for a platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loop, an organisation with thirty or more services on kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates production, giving every developer an ephemeral namespace instead of queuing for one shared staging environment, running the identical build and test definition locally and in ci so failures reproduce on a laptop. Of those, a platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loop and an organisation with thirty or more services on kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates production are not what Supabase is typically brought in for.
What can Garden do that Supabase cannot?
Garden covers Action graph, Shared result caching, Remote Kubernetes environments, In-cluster builds. Supabase covers PostgreSQL database, Auto-generated APIs, Authentication & authorization, Real-time subscriptions.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Garden: Is Garden still maintained?

The open source project remains on GitHub under Incredibuild ownership, but the commercial pricing page redirects to the docs and there is no public paid offer.

Supabase: How much does Supabase cost?

Supabase offers a free tier and three paid plans. Pro starts at $25 per month, Team at $599 per month, and Enterprise requires a custom quote. All pricing is in USD charged monthly.

Source
Garden: Do I need Kubernetes?

Effectively yes. Garden is built around Kubernetes environments and offers little to teams on other runtimes.

Supabase: What are Supabase's usage overage fees?

Pro plan users pay $0.00325 per monthly active user over the 100,000 included, and $0.125 per GB for database storage exceeding 8 GB per project. Compute instances cost $10 to $3,730+ per month.

Source
Garden: Does it replace my CI system?

No. It runs inside GitHub Actions, GitLab CI or similar and speeds up what those pipelines execute.

Garden: What is the actual saving?

It comes from skipping builds and tests whose inputs have not changed, so the benefit scales with how many services you have and how often only a few change.

Share

Related pages

Other head to heads